Skip to Navigation
The Collaborative Clearinghouse for Lawsuits and Other Claims Against ACE Group Insurance Companies

SMITHFIELD FOODS INC et al v. THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF NAVY

ATTENTION: It is possible that this information may no longer be current and therefore may be inaccurate. The index contains both open and closed cases and is not a complete list of cases in which an ACE Insurance Group company is involved. This information is provided to give interested persons an idea of the issues disputed in the indexed cases. For a full understanding of a case, one should read the rest of the court file, including the response. For the most up-to-date and complete information on a case, visit www.pacer.gov or contact the clerk of the relevant court.

Case Number: 
2:11-cv-01148 Search Pacer
ACE Group party(s): 
Opposing Party: 
Smithfield Foods Inc
Court Type: 
Federal
US District Court: 
Eastern District of Wisconsin
Date Filed: 
Dec 20 2011

"COUNT ONE-NEGLIGENCE

25. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference Paragraphs 1-24 as if they were set forth herein.

26. Defendant Navy, through its agents, servants and employees was responsible for, among other things, the security and tracking of all ordnances on the Twentynine Palms military base, including Camp Wilson. The Navy was under a duty to exercise due care to strictly comply with policies, procedures and standards in place which controlled the security and tracking of said ordnances.

27. The Navy breached those duties by failing to strictly abide by the following:
a. DOD 5100.76M which identifies "illumination" ordnances liked the M125 green star cluster flare as Category III controlled munitions;
b. Marine Corps Base Order 8023.1 provides "Ammunition of explosives will not be appropriated for personal use;" and
c. Marine Corps Base Order 8023.1 also outlines specific security protocol and restrictions for the use of a controlled ordnance, and sets forth a checklist for the security and tracking of all controlled ordnance.

28. The proscriptions referenced in Paragraph 35 against personal use and appropriation of a controlled ordnance are in place to prevent such an occurrence as took place July 5,2009.

29. Upon information and belief, the Officer in Charge of the Camp Wilson training range was responsible for the control, handling, and accountability of all ammunition and explosives used in training exercises, and was required to ensure that all unexpended munitions are inventoried, verified and received for an appropriate storage activity.

30. Upon information and belief, if any Class V items should go missing, which would include the subject flare, that misplaced item requires a Missing, Lost, Stolen, or Recovered Report, as required by MCO 4340.1.

31. Defendant Navy violated their own policies, procedures and standards by failing to account for unused ordnance (including the flare) before and/or after training exercises, specifically the ordnance absconded by Mr. Popp.

32. By its own admission, the Navy's failure to account for misappropriated or misused Class V ammunition invariably could result in significant damage to property.

33. As a result of Defendant Navy's aforementioned breach of duties, Mr. Popp was able to abscond with the flare, his subsequent use of which resulted in the July 5, 2009 fire (and the damages set forth above).

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs are entitled to damages from the Navy and they do hereby pray that judgment be entered in their favor and against the Navy as follows:
1. Damages be awarded in the amount of $365,000,000.00;
2. An award of attorneys fees and costs;
3. Any and all interest which may or has accrued; and
4. Such other and further relief as the court deems just and equitable."

The provided text is an excerpt from a document filed in this case. For a full understanding of the case, one should read the complete court file, including the response.

Javascript is required to view this map.